New Titles for Queen Margrethe's Descendants: 2008 & 2022

[lookupdown]

Originally Posted by Spheno

Perhaps Frederik would do it better.

Or perhaps she wants to preserve the relationship Frederik has with his brother. Someone in this thread mentioned her deep love for her family and I am starting to agree with it. Frederik seems to value his family very much, especially the relationship with his brother that was what made their childhood less lonely. Maybe if she takes this loss, Frederik doesn’t suffer in the future.

People are trying to make her a villain but I think it is more layered than that.

[Archduchess Zelia]

I very much agree. I think there are lots of layers to this decision and while I personally don't feel it was necessary to remove the titles, I am beginning to see what I think QMII's logic was. Also in terms of the timing which conveniently fell just before the general election that blew off a lot of the heat.

Originally Posted by Mbruno

What the law actually says is that people in the line of succession have to obtain consent from the monarch given in the Council of State to get married, or else the person who is getting married and the descendants of the marriage forefeit their succession rights. And there is an unwritten precedent set by King Frederik IX that consent can be conditional. For example, in Princess Benedikte's case, when her marriage was consented to, a condition for her children to remain in the line of succession was that they be raised in Denmark, which ultimately did not happen. It is debatable, however, if conditional consent is legal or not.

In any case, the law does not say anything about titles, which are a personal prerogative of the monarch. In the past, all persons in the line of succession were princes and they would lose their titles when they were excluded from the succession due to an unconsented marriage. If Nikolai and Felix were not given official consent to marry, whether they remained princes or not, the main fact is that they would lose their succession rights according to the law, which is far worse in my opinion than losing an HH.

I don't believe I ever claimed that the law specifies anything about the titles. I did, however, explain the current precedence when a prince outside the direct line marries with the monarch's consent (Joachim).

Originally Posted by Izzie

And how did QMII take the blow for MARY and Frederik when it was them that ended up holding the bag for this. It was them that had to face the media during their important trip to Vietnam and other events with microphones stuck in their faces. QMII got to walk by the press at events and just put out a too bad so sad follow up statement. So I don't buy the she took one for the team excuse. Frederik probably would have done it better and shown more tact, empathy.

The "blow" QMII took for M&F was the personal blow of demoting Joachim's family and especially, I'd say, Nikolai and Felix who are both very close to Frederik. Which would also be a public blow considering how the media loves to peddle the idea of a feud between the brothers and Frederik being the one to remove his nephews and niece's titles would just add to that narrative.

Additionally, QMII and Benedikte had just as many microphones stuck in their faces as M&F did. No working members of the DRF got to just "walk by the press".

[FigTree]

She did the right thing.

All over Europe this is now the case with royal families. Even In the UK with Harry’s children not having titles. They even get a title.

Adapt or die.

Darwin didn’t say the strongest will survive but that the most adaptable do.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by FigTree

She did the right thing.

All over Europe this is now the case with royal families. Even In the UK with Harry’s children not having titles. They even get a title.

Adapt or die.

Darwin didn’t say the strongest will survive but that the most adaptable do.

Harry's children will always be entitled to courtesy titles or styles, the reason that they were known from birth as master and miss was at the explicit request of their parents as they would have been 'Earl of Dumbarton' and 'Lady Lilibet' otherwise.

That they haven't been acknowledged as prince and princess of Sussex for the last few months, however, is Charles' decision.

[ronald biver]

No problem with titles in the Dutch royal family, every member of the Dutch royals knows who & what they are, no big publicity like the British royals or even the Danish royals.

[kalnel]

Originally Posted by ronald biver

No problem with titles in the Dutch royal family, every member of the Dutch royals knows who & what they are, no big publicity like the British royals or even the Danish royals.

Shows how forward-thinking then-Queen Beatrix was 40 years ago!

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Somebody

Harry's children will always be entitled to courtesy titles or styles, the reason that they were known from birth as master and miss was at the explicit request of their parents as they would have been 'Earl of Dumbarton' and 'Lady Lilibet' otherwise.

That they haven't been acknowledged as prince and princess of Sussex for the last few months, however, is Charles' decision.

Since it seems that Harry and Meg didnt want to use the titles of Lord DUmbarton and Lady Lillibet for thier children, its harldy likely that they would iwsh them to be Prince and Princess.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by kalnel

Shows how forward-thinking then-Queen Beatrix was 40 years ago!

Not really 40 years ago.

The titles for the children of Princess Beatrix were regulated by a Royal
Decree, issued by Queen Juliana in 1966. That is 56 years ago.

The titles for the children of Princess Margriet were regulated by a Royal Decree, issued by Queen Juliana in 1967. That is 55 years ago.

The titles for the children of Prince Constantijn were regulated by a Royal Decree, issued by Queen Beatrix in 2001. That is 21 years ago.

The titles for the children of Prince Willem-Alexander were regulated by a Royal Decree, issued by Queen Beatrix in 2002. That is 20 years ago.

The modernized Royal House Act 2002 was assented by Queen Beatrix in the same year. In 2004, as a result of said modernized Royal House Act 2002, the late Prince Johan Friso lost his title Prince of the Netherlands when he married without requesting an Act of Consent.

The titles for the children of Prince Johan Friso were regulated by a Royal Decree, issued by Queen Beatrix in 2004. That is 18 years ago.

The only adult Prince "hit" with the loss of a title so far was Prince Johan Friso. The same will happen might Amalia, Alexia or Ariane decide not to request an Act of Consent (like their uncle Johan Friso, like their great-aunts Irene and Christina) or lose the membership of the Royal House in another way. Then they will cease to be a Princess of the Netherlands. Actually that was a long-standing policy in Denmark as well. See the many Counts and Countesses of Rosenborg.

The difference in Denmark is that a new decision "hits" members with a set date in the future (1 January 2023) but okay: somewhere Queen Margrethe had to make a decision. And so to see, she wanted to make this decision rather than leaving it to the future King.

[ppetrica]

Originally Posted by FigTree

She did the right thing.

All over Europe this is now the case with royal families. .

Exactly.
And there is another layer to this.
Look at what's happening in UK and Norway. Race is the biggest issue in the media currently in western world, even problems and issues that have nothing to do with it are (deliberately by certain people and media) being presented as racial.
Now imagine Nikolai or Felix announcing engagement to a lady of mixed race origin. MII, royal family, court, monarchy and Danish society would immediately be accused of racism if the princes were to lose the titles upon marriage.
Even though we all know that race isn't an issue in DRF (just remember Alexandra).

[JR76]

Originally Posted by ppetrica

Exactly.

And there is another layer to this.

Look at what's happening in UK and Norway. Race is the biggest issue in the media currently in western world, even problems and issues that have nothing to do with it are (deliberately by certain people and media) being presented as racial.

Now imagine Nikolai or Felix announcing engagement to a lady of mixed race origin. MII, royal family, court, monarchy and Danish society would immediately be accused of racism if the princes were to lose the titles upon marriage.

Even though we all know that race isn't an issue in DRF (just remember Alexandra).

Why make race a part of this when it isn't? Durek's race is, with a few exceptions, not the focus of the domestic coverage of the issue of him marrying Märtha Louise with the media instead rightly focusing on all the lunatic claims he's so happy to share with the world to make some money keep. If anything him being American is a tougher nut to swallow than the colour of his skin.
The same would most likely be the case in Denmark. It's not a country that has a tendency to make ants out of molehills and false accusations of racism by a hurt prince would not be taken lightly by neither the establishment nor by the public.
That the Monpezat title issue turned into such a circus was because some of those involved couldn't stop talking to pot-stirring members of the media coupled with the public genuinely feeling that it had all been handled badly by the family/court.
As we've seen on several instances the court is far from a perfect organisation and Scandinavia have both tabloids and issues with racism, but we're nowhere close to the dumpster fires that is UK & USA.

[ppetrica]

Originally Posted by JR76

Why make race a part of this when it isn't? .

That's exactly what I said, I agree.
In this hypothetical situation race issue would be artificially created by some, in my opinion US media (no offence to any US contributor on TRF) or individuals even though we all know it'd have nothing to do with it.
I am certain MII is a good observer of everything that's going on in the world and she has taken into consideration many possible future scenarios. And this is just one of the many.


MII has been described as a vilain and coldhearted, but I'm certain that this decision hasn't been easy on her either, even before it all went public.

[JR76]

Originally Posted by ppetrica

That's exactly what I said, I agree.

In this hypothetical situation race issue would be artificially created by some, in my opinion US media (no offence to any US contributor on TRF) or individuals even though we all know it'd have nothing to do with it.

I am certain MII is a good observer of everything that's going on in the world and she has taken into consideration many possible future scenarios. And this is just one of the many.

Got it [emoji106]
The supposed views of US media would have very little effect on the views of Danish citizens so it'd be a non-issue. In fact, knowing the Danes, if they even cared they'd pride themselves of behaving exactly opposite of what the US media thinks.

[Viv]

Originally Posted by Izzie

Why does QMII get to use her title for her hobby of doing stage and movies scenery and costumes? Does she use her title when she does paintings? Those don't seem to be part of her official duties/responsibilities (even though some of it is posted on the official calendar for some reason)....those are side hustles (as some say)...not part of her constitutional role as the monarch.

In addition to your question I better mention that since the mid 1970s QMIi has designed a substantial number of church textiles and vestments like bishop’s robes, chasubles and antependiums ( altar front cover). IIRC in the beginning she made the textiles herself, but later, when her “ order book” grew, she delegated the needlework to seamstresses and embroiderers from a guild associated with ecclesiastic art and crafts.

Many years ago HM did get some criticism for her involvement in this
field, a.o. for “ talking the bread out of the mouths of the textile artists
and crafts persons”. HM has mainly made “textiles” for churches she
and the royal House are associated with, but there are exceptions
to this rule! As I understand it: in some cases she made and offered textiles on her own initiative, but I believe that she has mostly been
asked by Church Councils and the like.
For the record: Denmark proper has 10 dioceses/bishops and HM has
made the robes for 5 of them!
There is an extensive list of her church vestments etc. on the DRF
website. There you go - another side of her artistisk expression and
passion, and no payment involved of course.
You decide what you make of HMs “recreational pursuits”!

PS: sorry for going OT, but IMO this should be mentioned when discussing
Non- royalty related activities in public by titled royals!

[CrownPrincessJava]

Originally Posted by Izzie

By what Muhler just outlined, Why does QMII get to use her title for her hobby of doing stage and movies scenery and costumes? Does she use her title when she does paintings? Those don't seem to be part of her official duties/responsibilities (even though some of it is posted on the official calendar for some reason)....those are side hustles (as some say)...not part of her constitutional role as the monarch.

As Viv pointed out, QMII used her skill as an artist rather than using her title. Another two examples are King W-A and Prince William. In the case of Prince William, he donated his salary to charity, as the is rule servicemen have to be paid. King W-A regularly flies for KLM as he is a pilot and wishes to keep his licence valid. QMII used her skill as a donation, and when it became too much, it looks like she opened the opportunitty to seamstresses, tailors and the like.

Prince Nikolai used his title for personal financial gain. QMII did it because she wanted too and frankly, probably opened the doors of opportunity to many struggling artists

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

What the law actually says is that people in the line of succession have to obtain consent from the monarch given in the Council of State to get married, or else the person who is getting married and the descendants of the marriage forefeit their succession rights. And there is an unwritten precedent set by King Frederik IX that consent can be conditional. For example, in Princess Benedikte's case, when her marriage was consented to, a condition for her children to remain in the line of succession was that they be raised in Denmark, which ultimately did not happen. It is debatable, however, if conditional consent is legal or not.

In any case, the law does not say anything about titles, which are a personal prerogative of the monarch. In the past, all persons in the line of succession were princes and they would lose their titles when they were excluded from the succession due to an unconsented marriage. If Nikolai and Felix were not given official consent to marry, whether they remained princes or not, the main fact is that they would lose their succession rights according to the law, which is far worse in my opinion than losing an HH.

Originally Posted by Archduchess Zelia

I don't believe I ever claimed that the law specifies anything about the titles.

No, but I don't think Mbruno's post suggested that you did. As your post happened to mention law and precedent, it was a suitable opportunity for a clarification for all the readers of the thread about what the law actually specifies, which I greatly appreciated since it is a topic on which misinformation is rife. (On other forums, there have been plenty of comments falsely claiming that all male-line descendants of monarchs have a "right" to be Princes of Denmark and that not even monarchs(!) have the right to strip them.)

On that topic, here is a link to the present Act of Succession, which, as Mbruno explained, deals only with rights to the throne, not to titles.

https://english.stm.dk/media/8875/th...f-march-27.pdf

Previously I posted a royal cabinet order of 1774 which has been the subject of frequent false claims that it entitles all male-line descendants of monarchs to be Princes of Denmark. In reality, it dealt only with the titles of HH and HRH, as used by princes and princesses who belong to the Royal House, and, as it is merely a cabinet order and not an Act of Parliament, it may be overturned by subsequent monarchs/governments.

https://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...ml#post2496700

Originally Posted by ppetrica

Exactly.
And there is another layer to this.
Look at what's happening in UK and Norway. Race is the biggest issue in the media currently in western world, even problems and issues that have nothing to do with it are (deliberately by certain people and media) being presented as racial.
Now imagine Nikolai or Felix announcing engagement to a lady of mixed race origin. MII, royal family, court, monarchy and Danish society would immediately be accused of racism if the princes were to lose the titles upon marriage.
Even though we all know that race isn't an issue in DRF (just remember Alexandra).

A very good point. Nikolai and Felix are themselves mixed-race through Alexandra. It is likely they will marry earlier than their younger half-siblings, and while the family's original expectation that they would be stripped of their titles upon marriage would be consistent with the treatment of past generations' children of younger sons, someone could choose to present it as targeted towards them or their mother, no matter whom they married.

Even in a scenario such as their half-brother Henrik marrying a bride who is of completely western European ancestry, a royal couple or their supporters could always find some other grounds for accusations of bigotry against her. One only needs to notice the hostility directed by supporters or fans of many different royals, from various monarchies and various backgrounds, against people who are perceived as critical or obstructive of said royals. The specific accusations differ from case to case, but the aggression is the same.

Originally Posted by JR76

Durek's race is, with a few exceptions, not the focus of the domestic coverage of the issue of him marrying Märtha Louise with the media instead rightly focusing on all the lunatic claims he's so happy to share with the world to make some money keep. If anything him being American is a tougher nut to swallow than the colour of his skin.

Durek Verrett himself has repeatedly stated in strong terms that his race is the reason for Norwegians' attention to and low opinions of his professional claims.

Originally Posted by JR76

[Denmark is] not a country that has a tendency to make ants out of molehills and false accusations of racism by a hurt prince would not be taken lightly by neither the establishment nor by the public.
That the Monpezat title issue turned into such a circus was because some of those involved couldn't stop talking to pot-stirring members of the media coupled with the public genuinely feeling that it had all been handled badly by the family/court.

Did you mean to say "would be taken lightly" (as not taking it lightly would imply taking it seriously)?

I'm not sure I understand your conclusion from the recent title issues. To me it has demonstrated that hurt Danish princes who go public with accusations are already taken seriously, even without any implications of racism being involved.

Originally Posted by JR76

Got it [emoji106]
The supposed views of US media [...]

I'd say it is a well-supported supposition because, as ppetrica mentioned, we have the current examples of the UK and Norway as evidence of how the US media treats accusation of racism involving European monarchies.

Originally Posted by JR76

In fact, knowing the Danes, if they even cared they'd pride themselves of behaving exactly opposite of what the US media thinks.

You are much more knowledgeable about Danish society than I am, but on the other hand, I am fairly sure that in 2015, most TRF posters would have said exactly the same about the UK. As we have seen, it emerged as more complicated than that: While there remains a distinct difference between the behavior and reactions of the media and the public in the UK and US, there has also been a considerable focus on and influence from the US in the UK discourse.

Besides, as I said to ppetrica, it would not necessarily need to be race - a prince or his wife who resented the loss of the title, or their fans amongst the public, could always find alternative rationalizations to claim that they are being personally targeted.

Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair

The only adult Prince "hit" with the loss of a title so far was Prince Johan Friso. The same will happen might Amalia, Alexia or Ariane decide not to request an Act of Consent (like their uncle Johan Friso, like their great-aunts Irene and Christina) or lose the membership of the Royal House in another way. Then they will cease to be a Princess of the Netherlands. Actually that was a long-standing policy in Denmark as well. See the many Counts and Countesses of Rosenborg.

Under the Royal House Act 2002, Alexia and Ariane will automatically lose their membership and their title Princess of the Netherlands if and when, as is likely, a child of Amalia ascends the throne. I hope the law will be revised before that happens.

Originally Posted by FigTree

All over Europe this is now the case with royal families.

True, but with the exception of King Juan Carlos I of Spain in 1987, the other monarchs have not stripped titles from adult members of their family.

But you are quite correct that nearly all European monarchies have taken measures to reduce the number of titled family members as well as the number of family members who enjoy a public role (and in the Scandinavian monarchies, the two are interlinked). Which is why, though I understand the criticisms of the Queen for the execution or timing of the change, I see it very differently in regard to those who insist that all of Nikolai, Felix, and Henrik's future male-line descendants should be Princes to Denmark ad infinitum and criticize the Queen for the very principle of keeping the Royal House compact, which is neither new to Denmark nor out of the ordinary in Europe in 2022.

[Izzie]

If true, what a careless and unprofessional mistake...so, who approves the changes to the website over there? It is like amateur hour over there. Did they think maybe no one would notice?
https://www.bt.dk/royale/bts-royale-...ar-man-taenker

https://www.bt.dk/royale/broeler-hos...-for-tidligt-0

[tommy100]

Shows again how this is simply being seen as a professional matter rather than a family one. A really careless mistake.

[Toledo]

Ouch! Not a way to look forward the start of the new year for Joachim's kids. Don't they run this by QMII first before the Webmaster presses the enter key on the update?


...The new titles will not come into force until 1 January 2023, but according to Ekstra Bladet, the children were listed as Count Nikolai, Count Felix, Count Henrik and Countess Athena on the Royal Family's website on Wednesday morning.

Jacob Heinel Jensen points out that the Royal Danish House has had communication problems during the year and adds:

"Of course you can make mistakes, but at this point you might have hoped that they would have been a little more careful – also because it's as sensitive as we know it still is."

On Wednesday noon, the Royal Family corrected their website so that Prince Joachim's children are now again listed as princes and princesses, and the Royal Family's communications department told Ekstra Bladet that there had been "a regrettable technical error".

[polyesco]

Technical difficulties happen. A professional website takes time to change. That it was available live was an error but they need it ready sooner rather than later.

[tommy100]

Why, if there is upset within the family having the website change on the stroke of midnight really does just seem to be rubbing salt in the wounds. One would think there are bigger issues for the Communication Team to focus on.